Last night I played a casual game with a guy I met through X Wing locally. He's still relatively green at the game, but we had fun.

If we had a rules question I'd answer it and offer to do a quick search in the RRG/Forums to confirm it. If he got stuck on what to do or something like that, I'd offer my advice even if it wasn't the best for me. And I brought my list I'm working on even though it was a casual game, I did not treat it as a must win at all costs.

I had fun, I hope he had fun... everybody wins. I tend to take the tournaments I attend as pretty casual (even Regionals). If you're cool, I'll be cool. Ultimately for me, it's some plastic freakin spaceships. If you can't have fun, well, I'll do my best to beat you, and move on to the next opponent.

Ultimately, isn't a game what we're all there for?

Now, here is what happens when I give the 1 freebie. I let them know that I do give 1 and only 1 and I explain that the only way to learn is to make mistakes. 9 times out of 10, once they make that mistake and they get to fix it they are on the look out for it again and are even more careful from that point on.

I have hear of an issue where someone got mad because their maneuver ended them off the board and they wanted to take that back. I don't allow a move to be taken back. It is harsh but it is a lesson learned. Before that even occurs I point out a few turns prior that a ship looks like it is getting close to running off the table. I say it in a fun loving "on no!" fashion that helps ramp up the games feel a little. In the end I feel that a locked in maneuver tool is sacrosanct. If there is one thing in this game that should be learned above all else, it is movement and so mistakes are going to help you with that.

Here might actually be a problem.

What I take from your posts is that you are someone that always wants to improve his game. You don't always bring tournament lists, but you always bring something with the intention to learn something, and winning is very important to you. You know the rules by the book, don't make a lot of mistake yourself, but are quick to remind your opponent of his. No matter how you approach it, you take this game very seriously. And that might be a turn off for some other players. Here's some quotes from you:

''I don't honestly understand this. Isn't the goal to win?''

''I do ask that people play to the rules. That is just how the game is meant to be played.''

''See, I don't understand that. This is a game. Playing with out playing by the rules or completely using the rules makes no sense to me.''

''I am not trying to do the "optimal move". I want to learn, so I make mistakes and am fine with that in fun play. The goal is to learn new things. That is why I play silly lists like my Neb's Away list or 4 Nebulon-B's, or such. These are lists to learn more about. To learn new things and what can be done and what should not be done. ''

'' (about giving one take back) Sounds harsh but I find that it is fair and does not let the game devolve into a game of takesie backsies''

''The game is what you are playing, so play that. Don't focus on other things because that is how you get distracted''

''I wanted to at my Neb's Away list that I designed for Drasnighta. I wanted to see how it would handle. That is my idea of fun. Learning something new about this deep game. ''

But you know what? There is nothing wrong with any of that, that's just your own personal way of enjoying Armada. You constantly analyse, not getting distracted by things outside the game. I'm pretty sure that unconsciously, there is a change in your mood if something doesn't go your way.

Now, all you have to understand, is that not everyone is like you. Some people will play a game of Armada a friday night just to relax, to forget about their week and the constant pressure of society; They might not feel like taking the game seriously; They might not feel like having someone point out their mistakes; They might not feel like having a game where a mistake they made will not be taken back (except for a strict rule of 1); They might not care about learning and improving their game and losing because one of their ship went outside; They might just want to have fun laughing and relaxing while playing Armada. So if you are a strict player with a serious personality that won't talk much during a game to not get distracted, I can see why someone would not want to play you on a casual game night.

You just have to accept that you can't please everyone and move on.

I've actually run into this problem a few times personally: a player who is constantly talking about the rules or explaining the rules is really not fun to play against.

I know the rules pretty well but not infallibly. There was one time where someone made me walk through every step of making an attack separately as if I didn't know them. That wasn't fun. Even if he didn't realize he was being an ass.

Sometimes your level of ability is just not equal. It's not fun to get beaten a lot.

I would deeply avoid "checking" your opponents moves to see if they're within distance bands or other small things. If it looks like it's plausible let it be.

The upside competitively to playing this way is that you create really good practice fighting against uneven odds.

Lyr,

You mentioned you allow one take backsies a game? Like... in a casual setting? What constitutes a take back? Forgetting you do your Engineering before your attack? Activating the wrong ship when you meant to activate a different one?

Just being honest off the bat. Even having a policy like that sounds a bit too competitive.

Edit: I mean, context is everything of course. It seems like a lot of this thread needs a lot more context.

Sorry Ly, not trying to be unduly harsh. I saw the emoticon's but dismissed them because I wanted to bring up the point that ego, perceived or otherwise is a big factor in the way people address and accept you. Confidence is important, I will never say otherwise, but Confidence runs a fine, slippery slope to egotistical. It's good to be confident, but not good to be over-confident. At least if you're trying to attract people to you in your local shop.

There are definitely situations where you should exude confidence to put yourself above reproach; however there are also others, especially casual situations, where such a persona will win you no favors.

Anyway, thank you for explaining you take 1 chance rule. However I have to ask, were you explaining or justifying?

Because honestly not mater the justification, its honestly a rule that I feel needs to be mitigated unless you're in a specific social contract for the game. Having hard fast rules, regardless of how many suggestion or tips you make during the game, does not lend itself to casual/fun play. An it can make the difference if someone wants to play you again in the future.

Ultimately Ly, this comes down to what you want. Change is a hard thing, no-one is ever comfortable with change. As well, it requires us to step out of our comfort zone. I'm no exceptional example of this, an there are lines that I have drawn in the sand for myself because I found where I believe my boundaries are. However I still do what I can to try.

You need to ask yourself though, did you come here for honest discourse to see if there is honest advice that you can apply to your current situation so you can perhaps adjust to become more approachable at the table top. Or do you simply decide that it's too much work, and not worth it in the long run.

It's up to you, but, if your concerned you might be more a detriment to your social circle then not, you might want to at least take time to triple check your actions and reactions in the future, in any social situation, be it the forums, the game store, or anywhere else for that matter.

I've had to break gaming habits of mine from PC gaming, to Table top in order to not come off as a raging ars, I'm not perfect at it, still, but I check myself often.

Anyway, take this for what it's worth.

Personally, for me, I try and be as neutral about my play ability as I can. This includes not saying things like "I have an innate sense of Tactics. That is my thing. I get most people do not." which just serves to separate you from other people in a way that makes them feel inadequate.

If I'm good my play will speak for itself. I don't need to be confident and exuding confidence to other players in my play ability just makes me have to live up to that, which makes the game taxing to play.

Threads like this kill me. I drive many miles to try and play against people better than me. I pray everyday the next world champ moves to my meta. And then the runner up follows him.

I drove 6 hours to compete in a second regional. There's a difference between enjoying competitive play and expecting that everybody you meet enjoys competitive play (or enjoys it all the time).

Some people just want to push plastic spaceships. No crime in that.

Lyr,

You mentioned you allow one take backsies a game? Like... in a casual setting? What constitutes a take back? Forgetting you do your Engineering before your attack? Activating the wrong ship when you meant to activate a different one?

Just being honest off the bat. Even having a policy like that sounds a bit too competitive.

Edit: I mean, context is everything of course. It seems like a lot of this thread needs a lot more context.

Your first example. It is a missed opportunity since that is usually the only thing that needs to be flexible on. I remind people that it is their one freebie and when it was supposed to actually occur.

Wrongfully activated ships, usually I am discussing strategy of what's going on in my mind and so it happens but I don't let it get taken back. The ship has moved. Once that has happened, that is the position that ship will stay.

I get that it sounds competitive but honestly, it helps players more often than not. I am not a super uptight rules holder. I will remind people once that Adds happen after the roll but not force it. I will remind people that tokens are spent at what times, etc but honestly, most rules are pretty basic, like a ram, or shooting, etc. Thus the only things that get missed or need to be fixed are missed opportunities.

Threads like this kill me. I drive many miles to try and play against people better than me. I pray everyday the next world champ moves to my meta. And then the runner up follows him.

Someone can be good at a game and be the most fun to play. Someone can be good at a game and be the least fun to play.

There are obviously some players that can't take losing, and thus can't take playing against decent players. But those types of players are probably not well regarded anyway amongst their fellows so who cares what they think.

Some people are just a pain to play games with. For any variety of reasons not at all connected to whether they will beat you or not. They could just not be pleasant people in general or they could have a number of gaming habits that are just god **** annoying.

"Too competitive" is likely not at all related to perceived play skill and more likely related to a number of habits that just make people steer clear.

I would deeply avoid "checking" your opponents moves to see if they're within distance bands or other small things. If it looks like it's plausible let it be.

The upside competitively to playing this way is that you create really good practice fighting against uneven odds.

Sometimes when watching an opponent place a model it seems like it is further forward than it really is. Oh, and that incident happened a year ago. Since then, I have learned from it and don't do it anymore. I only point it out if it is well over.

Anyway, thank you for explaining you take 1 chance rule. However I have to ask, were you explaining or justifying?

Because honestly not mater the justification, its honestly a rule that I feel needs to be mitigated unless you're in a specific social contract for the game. Having hard fast rules, regardless of how many suggestion or tips you make during the game, does not lend itself to casual/fun play. An it can make the difference if someone wants to play you again in the future.

What rules do you think, can be played "hard/fast"?

I am honestly curious because, I let certain things go in a casual setting that I ask be done in a tournament. Such as when the Add occurs in an attack, spending tokens and declaring speed changes after you have locked in the tool. Things like that.

So what else can be played all loose goosey that still makes the game Armada?

On that note, why does the game have to be played hard/fast like that to be casual? Can't 2 players play by the rules, joke, laugh, and play a game and it be casual?

Personally, for me, I try and be as neutral about my play ability as I can. This includes not saying things like "I have an innate sense of Tactics. That is my thing. I get most people do not." which just serves to separate you from other people in a way that makes them feel inadequate.

If I'm good my play will speak for itself. I don't need to be confident and exuding confidence to other players in my play ability just makes me have to live up to that, which makes the game taxing to play.

This is something I can declare on the forums with no issue. I don't go bragging about it in person. I just play the game. The forums allows me to put that out there and it can be respected. I long ago learned not to do that around people.

Threads like this kill me. I drive many miles to try and play against people better than me. I pray everyday the next world champ moves to my meta. And then the runner up follows him.

I have last year's GenCon 2nd place near me to keep me in check. . . I wish I had IceCube nearby. He would be fun to play against.

Lyr,

You mentioned you allow one take backsies a game? Like... in a casual setting? What constitutes a take back? Forgetting you do your Engineering before your attack? Activating the wrong ship when you meant to activate a different one?

Just being honest off the bat. Even having a policy like that sounds a bit too competitive.

Edit: I mean, context is everything of course. It seems like a lot of this thread needs a lot more context.

Your first example. It is a missed opportunity since that is usually the only thing that needs to be flexible on. I remind people that it is their one freebie and when it was supposed to actually occur.

Wrongfully activated ships, usually I am discussing strategy of what's going on in my mind and so it happens but I don't let it get taken back. The ship has moved. Once that has happened, that is the position that ship will stay.

I get that it sounds competitive but honestly, it helps players more often than not. I am not a super uptight rules holder. I will remind people once that Adds happen after the roll but not force it. I will remind people that tokens are spent at what times, etc but honestly, most rules are pretty basic, like a ram, or shooting, etc. Thus the only things that get missed or need to be fixed are missed opportunities.

It does indeed sound competitive, so here might be your answer, especially if not every player find it helpful. The player that didn't want to play against you probably doesn't find it useful. Not everyone take every game to better themselves.

More often than not, when someone says that someone is ''too competitive'' can be translated by ''taking the game too seriously'' or ''not fun to play against''. At this point, after now 5 pages, I think that you should have a good idea of what the problem might be, unless you really can't do some introspection about your way of playing. I suggest that if you want to take it further, just ask the player directly what is the problem.

I will confess I might have barried my lead. I have nothing against rules. However there are two kinds of rules in this instance. The game rules and your own personal rules. Within a margin of error, one of these two sets of rules are infantily more maluable.

Personal rules, especially your one chance rule in my opinion should be amended to a situational bases. Putting a hard limit on making Manor adjustments missed opportunities and just general pleasantness in casual play feels unnecessarily confining. Even if you follow your personal rules.

Anyway, the point is Lynn, if you want to change and you want to prove it to those around you, you will need to do more then just pay lipservice to the idea. They will actively need to see you adjust your competitors levels down in casual/pickup games.

All these points I've listed and others have mentioned I only harp on because I see them as major sources of probable friction.

Know that I'm not attacking you Ly. An I may well be off on some points, but I will be blunt. If you want to address the issue. Don't get defensive. Contemplate your actions. In the end I hope this helps you in some way.

If I make it a situation based rule, then I am unable to be fair towards all people I play.

Within reason, my general philosophy on missed opportunities is whatever. I'd rather my opponent come out of the game realizing they won or lost because of how we flew our fleets and not because I was a jerk and didn't allow them to do a msised opportunity.

The within reason part is hard to describe, but an unreasonable rollback, in my opinion, is one where the game has progressed past a point where rolling back to X would significantly change the events since X.

Life is a minutia, Lyraeus. Lots of grey area's. It sucks, even for the well adjusted, or social butterflies among us.

Placing a rule set on yourself, or anyone does not always grant fairness in a casual situation. It can cause tension and the situation you are dealing with this player.

Ultimately Ly, I know this will be hard for you. I dont want you to continually have to try and prove your point. Just that that rule and the way you function on that list above would be good starting point on how to prove to your real life counterparts that you are actively trying become of sociable. I dont think I can say anymore, I know your not trying to defensive because you have nothing better to do. You might not be able to see a way to change these things and still maintain a proper rule set to go about your day.

Life sucks, complications suck even more. But if you actively want to make yourself a more socially amiable person. This thread and maybe seeking out others with a similar background would help you improve your ability to deal with complication. I dont mean to sound condescending. An I dont mean this with any ill intent. Frankly I only have a cursory understanding, and I dont know you particularly well at all. So I may be way off.

If you honestly want to try, however, I'll lend a hand however I can, if you so desire it.

Just know that all of us sometimes dont like to deal with people at some point or another. People are messy, aggravating bastards, but the best thing you can do is persist and not shut out the advice all through out this thread and people in your social circle. If you want to adjust better it will take time. I think you can do it, but you have to honestly want it first before anything can happen.

Good luck Ly, ill be rooting for you if you pursue it.

Also do you still want those cards?

I feel rollbacks are completely situational as well.

Last armada game I played could be described as actually multiple different games within one because of rollbacks.

Details...

My opponent had initiative and chose to go second. I looked at his objectives and saw that he had advanced gunnery but had a fleet that didn't take advantage of it at all. So I gleefully choose it and smiled. After about 10 seconds of looking at my list and then at his... "**** that was a poor decision including advanced gunnery". So we called that one before it even began.

Next I deployed by MC80 parallel to my deployment but too close to my table edge. I deployed in a way that was literally impossible for me to turn without clipping the edge. **** speed two. So I had a turn where my corner was off the table. So I'm not very good with MC80s... Don't judge me.

Later in the game(s) he flew his ISD right off the table. Ok not right off, it was close but definitely clipping the edge. That's game. Roll it back adjust a smidge to keep it on the table and we keep going. At that point he blew my MC80 to smithereans and with no more ships he was the final "winner" of the game.

After that we set the game back to a particular point were I made a major tactical decision as I wanted to see how the game would play out if I chose a different strategy. I ended up loosing that one too.

Why all the rollbacks? For starters we didn't have time to play multiple full games but we could play an extended one game. We could have played through that first game with advanced gunnery knowing full well that I had the distinct advantage and we could of called it a game when I realized I set m MC80 on a collision course or when he flew his ISD off the table. But we wanted to keep playing. So roll it back and let's keep going.

So at the end of night I guess you could say I won 2 and he won 2? But he had the final win? Does it matter? Not to me.

I give this as an example of how in a casual game there aren't hard fast rules that are immutable. Flying you flagship off the table usually means you lost the game. Everyone universally understands that. But we had an hour so why no keep going?

It was a situation where rollbacks made sense. Not every game is like that. Totally depends on your opponent.

I feel rollbacks are completely situational as well.

Last armada game I played could be described as actually multiple different games within one because of rollbacks.

Details...

My opponent had initiative and chose to go second. I looked at his objectives and saw that he had advanced gunnery but had a fleet that didn't take advantage of it at all. So I gleefully choose it and smiled. After about 10 seconds of looking at my list and then at his... "**** that was a poor decision including advanced gunnery". So we called that one before it even began.

Next I deployed by MC80 parallel to my deployment but too close to my table edge. I deployed in a way that was literally impossible for me to turn without clipping the edge. **** speed two. So I had a turn where my corner was off the table. So I'm not very good with MC80s... Don't judge me.

Later in the game(s) he flew his ISD right off the table. Ok not right off, it was close but definitely clipping the edge. That's game. Roll it back adjust a smidge to keep it on the table and we keep going. At that point he blew my MC80 to smithereans and with no more ships he was the final "winner" of the game.

After that we set the game back to a particular point were I made a major tactical decision as I wanted to see how the game would play out if I chose a different strategy. I ended up loosing that one too.

Why all the rollbacks? For starters we didn't have time to play multiple full games but we could play an extended one game. We could have played through that first game with advanced gunnery knowing full well that I had the distinct advantage and we could of called it a game when I realized I set m MC80 on a collision course or when he flew his ISD off the table. But we wanted to keep playing. So roll it back and let's keep going.

So at the end of night I guess you could say I won 2 and he won 2? But he had the final win? Does it matter? Not to me.

I give this as an example of how in a casual game there aren't hard fast rules that are immutable. Flying you flagship off the table usually means you lost the game. Everyone universally understands that. But we had an hour so why no keep going?

It was a situation where rollbacks made sense. Not every game is like that. Totally depends on your opponent.

I couldn't do that. . . There are just tooany this wrong with all that in my mind. . .

As for your MC80, a trick is to go speed 2 and got 1 click towards the board center and click at 2 to go 1 towards the more edge. Oh and deploy the MC80 about distance 1 or so from the board edge, you should have no more problems.

Have only skimmed this thread, so I'll just answer the OP.

I've had one notable experience in my gaming, at X-Wing Regionals last year. It was an awesome day and I had great fun playing against solid and enthusiastic opponents.

Then there's this guy. "Competitive" would be a kind word to use, as he was focused solely on winning, and was extremely vocal during the game about how much the dice affected the result (to the exclusion of pilot skill). It is easily the least enjoyable game of anything I have had in my life, and winning brought me absolutely no joy (but I'll admit to at least a modicum of satisfaction at the result ). When this guy quit the hobby six months later, there were no tears to be found in our community.

I have a natural infinity for flying my ships through space rocks... Kinda my thing. Totally unintentional but it seems to happen every game,

As a final word I'll echo what has already been said. I see nothing wrong with the way you like to play Armada, don't let anyone tell you that you're not playing the game "right". Just be mindful that everyone is different. It's why I love playing games.

Game on, have fun, and when in doubt ask. Absolutely nothing wrong with asking someone what level of competitive/casualness they are looking for, Your example when someone declined to play you because you were too competitive. If you really wanted to play them, you still could. Let them know that you'll tone it back, buy them a 50 cent soda and do something crazy to have a good laugh. If the alternative was not playing what do you have to lose?

My job involves managing prison inmates, and basically the job boils down to getting them to do what we want, with the minimum amount of fuss.

All my co-workers approach our work situations with the same goal in mind. Often, we'll use the same dialogue.

But the results can be wildly different, because inter-personal relationships are HARD. Getting your message across to another person in a way they can understand, without getting them off-side is something that not all people can do. You have to pick your battles carefully, and be extremely careful about HOW you point out to someone that they're doing things the wrong way.

Honestly, think of the inter-personal dialogue and interactions as another layer of tactics. You have an objective (getting the other player to do what you want) and what you say and how you say it are your options, so consider them all carefully, and consider if the risks outweigh the rewards, which is the most effective approach, etc. Maybe changing the way you approach interpersonal relationships might help?

Fair point, Chuck... but I'm still waiting on scientists to identify and isolate the ***hole gene.

Fair point, Chuck... but I'm still waiting on scientists to identify and isolate the ***hole gene.

I'm full of 'em.